Re: Duplicate bugs (was Re: BUG #5547: not able to connect to postgres through the oracle using Linux ODBC driver for Postgres) - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Magnus Hagander
Subject Re: Duplicate bugs (was Re: BUG #5547: not able to connect to postgres through the oracle using Linux ODBC driver for Postgres)
Date
Msg-id AANLkTinW_bxSJ3JzGC6XEjC2WNmQwWOcmcSjXfYuna9j@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Duplicate bugs (was Re: BUG #5547: not able to connect to postgres through the oracle using Linux ODBC driver for Postgres)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-bugs
On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 15:26, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> writes:
>> On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 4:03 AM, Craig Ringer
>> <craig@postnewspapers.com.au> wrote:
>>> I wonder if there's any way to have the bug report form de-duplicate po=
sts
>>> based on similar/identical text in sequential submissions.
>
>> Not without starting down the path of writing a full blown bug
>> tracker. The current form just assigns a number from a sequence and
>> then forwards the text to the mailing list. None of the contents are
>> stored in the database.
>
> It seems though that it must be very easy to hit "submit" twice, because
> we keep seeing these dups. =A0Is there anything the webpage could do to
> discourage that? =A0Maybe take you to a different page after submitting?

The code I have up on the new system will make that a bit better, I
think. But the best thing would be to store the contents of a bug
report in a table somewhere just to  look for duplicates. We can
expire it after just a minute or so. That'll catch the *exact*
duplicates. It could catch partial ones, too.

I'll stick that on the TODO list for the new website ;)


--=20
 Magnus Hagander
 Me: http://www.hagander.net/
 Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Duplicate bugs (was Re: BUG #5547: not able to connect to postgres through the oracle using Linux ODBC driver for Postgres)
Next
From:
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade issues